which has always been an understood fact of SW [...] a laughable desperation ploy which obviously has no ultimate bearing whatsoever on commentaries or the original text of interviews [...] speculative revisionist fantasies

You know, if I were to question the foremost authority on a subject, I should hope my reasoning is a little better than "because I/we always assumed something" or "because it doesn't fit my opinion on the subject". *shrugs*

Quote:

but nothing about how or why the films themselves could be similarly ignored. In other forums which have since been killed off, Leland was asked to provide examples of this seemingly amazing result - and failed miserably, mostly changing the subject and producing only the non-example of Boba Fett, whose death was never confirmed in the films and whose possible survival is even now supported by statements from Lucas.

So, the inevitable result remains: Leland, as in all matters Dagobah, can safely be ignored.

I'm confused. Because he says he has an escape hatch in case of emergencies, one that hasn't so far been needed because the EU has only violated movie implications rather than outright facts, his fortunate lack of examples to the effect of the EU overriding the movies support why he should be ignored? Care to explain the logic to me?

Quote:

( Also note that 98% of the material in the commentaries fails to fit any of Leland's (a)-(b)-(c) categories. )

What does this mean? What little he has said about commentaries is really simple. Some of it is extracted as G-canon Lucas notes. The rest would by process of elimination be as canon as Star Trek, falling outside the Holocron completely. Aka non-canon._________________I discuss to learn, not to win. Then again, learning enough tends to translate to victory in the end anyway.

Last edited by DarthMRN on Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:15 pm; edited 1 time in total

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2011 5:53 am

Message

DarthMRNKnight

Joined: 20 Jul 2011Posts: 299

Arawn_Fenn wrote:

Do any of Leland's rationalizations for throwing out Lucas statements apply to Lucas' statement that Anakin is the Chosen One?

Was it something he said in the 70's that no longer pertains to his current vision of Star Wars? No. 2005 was not in the 70's.

Was he misquoted? No. Anyone can watch the featurette and hear him say it for themselves.

Was he making a joke or "off-the-cuff remark"? No. What's the punchline?

Was it said to someone behind the scenes to elicit a certain performance? No.

There is no basis whatsoever to discard this statement ( which was consistent with the strong implication of the films anyway ).

Hm, in a rare turn of events, I somewhat agree with this. If we go exclusively by the reasons listed for ignoring GL, there is little reason to doubt Ani being the Chosen One when he has said so. However, these being brief forum posts about a subject we fans are not really meant to understand completely, there might well be other reasons to ignore GL too.

Not to mention how Leland explicitly says Licensing is sent notes to adhere to, meaning that as would be expected from a business hierarchy, they do as they are told. So if GL didn't tell them to make this or that canon, he likely doesn't care what the EU does, even if it turns out to clash with his own opinons. Meaning in turn that anything of GL's that Licensing makes canon above what they are told to, is really a matter of them taking initiative beyond the call of duty. In other words, Leland chooses how seriously he wants to take Lucas. I guess what I'm getting at is that contrary to the idealized fantasy of fans, GL could well say and think a lot of things about SW, but unless he makes a formal effort to have those things recognized in the EU, the EU machine isn't beholden to them at all. Its adherence would be a courtesy, one that must be weighed against the reality of getting a satisfactory product on the shelves on time.

Until we see a canon product explicitly say from the narrator God perspective that yes, Ani is the Chosen One, or the Holocron entry on the topic is revealed to us saying the same, we can't know that is actually the case, no matter what GL says in commentaries. Even if those comments dodge any rationale for igoring them. From a scientific perspective: Something being possible isn't evidence that it is true. And due perhaps to George being lazy, and the nature of the aforementioned business machine, Leland is the treshold for what is true, while George making comments is not. Twisted perhaps, but there it is._________________I discuss to learn, not to win. Then again, learning enough tends to translate to victory in the end anyway.

Last edited by DarthMRN on Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:18 pm; edited 1 time in total

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:31 am

Message

Crash OverrideMaster

Joined: 22 Dec 2010Posts: 1962

This conversation about what's true in a fictional universe is too meta for me.

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:33 pm

Message

DarthMRNKnight

Joined: 20 Jul 2011Posts: 299

You know, I have been waiting for years for someone to point that out. It never ceased to amaze me how fans would either treat the GFFA as real right alongside me, or butt out completely. No one to actually say: "We are all agreed that this stuff we treat as history is made up and continually revised every year, right? Right?"

A bit more on point: Isn't a discussion about what is true in this fictional universe a pretty important one on a forum devoted to that universe? Doesn't such a truth lay the ground rules under which any debate about in-universe content can be resolved? For example, if someone wants to know whether Ani ever wore red pants in canon, wouldn't we need to know what is canon first?_________________I discuss to learn, not to win. Then again, learning enough tends to translate to victory in the end anyway.

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2011 4:36 pm

Message

Crash OverrideMaster

Joined: 22 Dec 2010Posts: 1962

Having re-read a large bulk of the Star Wars "continuity" over a short expanse of time, I've come to the realization that "canon" or "continuity" is an illusion. It's an label created by Lucasfilm with absolutely no substance behind it. And it's worked rather successfully. If a story is applied the label of "canon" or "continuity," suddenly fans value it more highly than they would otherwise. And yet there's no difference between whether that story is "canon" or not, either for that story or for other stories.

How often has a story had any significant effect on another story? There's no continuity between Jacen in the New Jedi Order series and Jacen in Dark Nest and Legacy of the Force. There's little continuity between those in general. There's not even continuity between Caedus in Legacy of the Force and Fate of the Jedi, with his motives being completely different. It's even worse in Bantam novels because there's pretty much no continuity between different authors, and what "continuity" there is consists of name drops that more often get facts wrong than right, like there being two Chu'unthors now because Kevin J. Anderson name dropped it as a ship that Callista trained on despite the handicap of crashing a few hundred years before she was born. They were pretty much advertisements for the other published Star Wars novels.

That it's even being discussed whether Leland Chee or George Lucas is the final "authority" on "canon" or "continuity" demonstrates how successful Lucasfilm has been with the label despite decades of contradictions and inconsistencies -- or how willing fans are to believe it. Whether Anakin wore red pants or not is ultimately a matter of if it's in a story -- whether the story has a label affixed to it or not is relevant ultimately only as a fan valuation of the story. If Anakin wore red pants in "Anakin Skywalker and the Red Pants of Tatooine," but Anakin doesn't wear red pants in any other story and "Anakin Skywalker and the Red Pants of Tatooine" and its events are never mentioned again in any other story, does it matter whether the label of "canon" is attached to it or not? That fact is only significant for THAT story. There's no broader "continuity."

What if a later story mentions it but says Anakin's pants in that story were blue, and both stories are labeled "canon"? Lucasfilm -- or fan (Wookieepedia) -- modus operandi is to attribute the later mention to a separate incident on Tatooine in which Anakin had blue pants which is coincidentally identical to the incident in which he had red pants. The idea that there's a single unified, consistent "continuity" in which any single "fact" can be ascertained is generally just an appeal to authority as an arguing tactic in these sorts of discussions. "[K]nowing what is canon" is simply an attempt to legitimize a particular interpretation, and in the process derailing the actual discussion of each individual's interpretation. One doesn't need to familiarize his or herself with every single quote from George Lucas or Leland Chee in order to enjoy and form his or her own conclusions about a story that they read or watched.

Or, ironically and optimistically, the fan obsession with "canon" arises out of all the inconsistencies and contradictions as some sort of attempt to make sense of it all. Though why it's of vital importance that there's clarification on whether Anakin wore red or blue pants due to two contradicting stories is a mystery to me. For instance, I'm not really invested in the Even Piell character, so I could not care less if he died at the Citadel or on Coruscant, and I'm not really waiting with baited breath for some sort of Lucasfilm clarification on the issue.

Whether Anakin is the Chosen One or not is ultimately a judgment call on the part of the reader/watcher/whatever. There's no objective fact that he was or wasn't the subject of the prophecy within the Star Wars universe, and there's no objective fact outside of it. There's the objective fact that it was the authorial intent on Lucas' part that he was the Chosen One, but some chose to disregard authorial intent. Discussing whether Anakin is the Chosen One allows numerous interpretations. Whether the label of "canon" is relevant to an interpretation is ultimately up to the individual, so discussing what is or isn't canon is only relevant to that interpretation.

Re: .

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:01 pm

Message

Arawn_FennKnight

Joined: 07 Apr 2011Posts: 219Location: Ekkaia

DarthMRN wrote:

You know, if I were to question the foremost authority on a subject, I should hope my reasoning is a little better than "because I/we always assumed something" or "because it doesn't fit my opinion on the subject".

Good for you, but that has nothing to do with anything I said. Also, Leland Chee is not the "foremost authority" on SW ( though some may try to wish him into such a position in order to accomplish an agenda ). That status belongs to a different person. Though it had seemed sufficiently self-explanatory in the first place, Leland's "was Lucas misquoted?" excuse was said to be obviously useless because of the fact that Lucas' quotes can be easily checked and confirmed. Thus, allegations that a Lucas quote is a "misquote" serve no ultimate purpose, and there's no opinion involved. Furthermore, "because I/we always assumed something" is the exact opposite of my stance regarding Lucas or anything else, so it's nothing more than projection. When you're trying to negate Lucas as an authority on SW, what you assume is being substituted in his place.

DarthMRN wrote:

I'm confused. Because he says he has an escape hatch in case of emergencies, one that hasn't so far been needed because the EU has only violated movie implications rather than outright facts, his fortunate lack of examples to the effect of the EU overriding the movies support why he should be ignored? Care to explain the logic to me?

It's not rocket science. He failed miserably when asked to provide examples of EU overriding the films, because EU doesn't override the films. The whole concept of a so-called "emergency" in this context does not make sense, being nothing more than a statement of the same old desperate up-is-down revisionism that puts C-canon above the films. Meanwhile, Sue Rostoni has explicitly said that it doesn't work that way ( after the creation of the Holocron ), and even the all-important Leland has echoed Rostoni's stance.

"On the other hand, the quote you provide makes it sound like the EU is separate from George's vision of the Star Wars universe. It is not. The EU must follow certain tenets set by George through the films and other guidelines that he provides outside of the films." - Leland Chee

DarthMRN wrote:

What does this mean?

It means exactly what it says: Leland's various excuses given to ignore Lucas don't apply to the material in the commentaries, and he has provided no similar rationale to justify the exclusion of that material.

DarthMRN wrote:

However, these being brief forum posts about a subject we fans are not really meant to understand completely, there might well be other reasons to ignore GL too.

It is only your assumption that we are not really meant to understand the subject completely. This is incorrect. There is no official support for this assumption anywhere.

DarthMRN wrote:

Until we see a canon product explicitly say from the narrator God perspective that yes, Ani is the Chosen One

We already have that. The ROTS DVD is a canon product. You seem to think that disingenuously asking for the "narrator God perspective" while simultaneously refusing to listen to the SW creator God perspective is a neat trick. It's not. You know what the "God perspective" is on this subject, but you don't accept it as superior to your own. Furthermore, even if you choose to ignore Lucas, holding out for a different answer on this subject is a doomed strategy. The status of the Chosen One is defined by destroying the Sith and thus restoring balance to the Force. Because Anakin does these things, Anakin is confirmed as the Chosen One. Ignoring Lucas won't magically remove the relevant events in ROTJ from canonical existence. To argue that Anakin is not the Chosen One requires more than just a game of Simon Says. It must be shown that he does not fit the definition of the Chosen One. This approach is destined to fail in light of the facts we have.

DarthMRN wrote:

Its adherence would be a courtesy, one that must be weighed against the reality of getting a satisfactory product on the shelves on time.

Hilarious. In what way does confirming or not confirming Anakin as the Chosen One interfere with "getting a satisfactory product on the shelves on time"?

The desperate rationalizations continue...

DarthMRN wrote:

or the Holocron entry on the topic is revealed to us saying the same

Utter nonsense. Since Holocron entries are not revealed to us, you can't use this as a requirement to exclude facts you don't like, because you won't be notified either way. By that rationale we can know nothing.

DarthMRN wrote:

Leland is the treshold for what is true

Only in your fantasies ( which, by your own admission, are "twisted" ).

Last edited by Arawn_Fenn on Thu Nov 24, 2011 10:36 am; edited 7 times in total

Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2011 9:11 am

Message

CerrineaMaster

Joined: 09 Jun 2009Posts: 1491

The Lucas documentaries are G Canon. Lucas unequivocally in the documentary that Anakin Skywalker is the Chosen One -- even when he was Vader he was still the Chosen One. Therefore Anakin is the Chosen One -- G canon._________________Roqoo Depot co-founder.

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:39 am

Message

DarthMRNKnight

Joined: 20 Jul 2011Posts: 299

Crash Override wrote:

Having re-read a large bulk of the Star Wars "continuity" over a short expanse of time, I've come to the realization that "canon" or "continuity" is an illusion. It's an label created by Lucasfilm with absolutely no substance behind it. And it's worked rather successfully. If a story is applied the label of "canon" or "continuity," suddenly fans value it more highly than they would otherwise. And yet there's no difference between whether that story is "canon" or not, either for that story or for other stories.

While I applaud your conclusion that it is largely an illusion, you are being way too absolute IMO. If what say here was true, PoD vs JvS or TCW vs EU CW wouldn't have caused fans to bat an eyelash. Details are what tend to be overlooked, and only with GL do those detail changes have large ramifications. That is a far cry from continuity not mattering at all.

Where I agree with the "canon is an illusion" line of thinking, is in the fact that theoretically, a creator can violate most anything created by the EU, and if somehow it isn't caught before release, it will pass through. More realistically, though, only small details, factual details that is, actually do so. The illusion lies in the theoretical extreme, not in the practical reality.

Quote:

How often has a story had any significant effect on another story?

Unless you set the bar really high for significant, I'd say that happens all the time. The recent Jedi: The Dark Side owes tons to the Jedi Apprentice series. The KotOR era, and by extension the TOR era, hinge on TotJ. By sheer grace of cronological closeness, I expect each novel of FotJ to rely on the last, and it on LotF, which in turn hinges on the NJO. I haven't read much of either series, but being as close as they are, I don't see how the turn of events in each can't depend completely on the last. This goes for every story part of a series anywhere in the EU, a fact that by itself answers your question.

Quote:

There's no continuity between Jacen in the New Jedi Order series and Jacen in Dark Nest and Legacy of the Force.There's little continuity between those in general. There's not even continuity between Caedus in Legacy of the Force and Fate of the Jedi, with his motives being completely different.

You are talking about character portrayal here. Nothing we have ever known about the Holocron promised that something as subjective and multi-author unfriendly as character portrayal would be consistent from work to work. The very idea is frankly utopian. Continuity can't even maintain black and white facts on the detail level, so obviously any portrayal consistency is a mere courtesy.

Quote:

Whether Anakin wore red pants or not is ultimately a matter of if it's in a story -- whether the story has a label affixed to it or not is relevant ultimately only as a fan valuation of the story. If Anakin wore red pants in "Anakin Skywalker and the Red Pants of Tatooine," but Anakin doesn't wear red pants in any other story and "Anakin Skywalker and the Red Pants of Tatooine" and its events are never mentioned again in any other story, does it matter whether the label of "canon" is attached to it or not? That fact is only significant for THAT story. There's no broader "continuity."

I disagree. The given example is, granted, hardly applicable to any further discussion, but I probably won't catch you saying that anything of primary interest to a specific story won't ever matter to the larger universe or other stories. Hell, it is arguable that the very Jacen you mention fit our purposes here, once upon a time serving mostly as a macguffin for the reborn Emperor in DE. He sure has gone on to play quite the part in other stories. If your argument hinges on the piece of canon being as irrelevant as a literal pair of red pants, it isn't much of an argument to begin with.

Quote:

The idea that there's a single unified, consistent "continuity" in which any single "fact" can be ascertained is generally just an appeal to authority as an arguing tactic in these sorts of discussions. "[K]nowing what is canon" is simply an attempt to legitimize a particular interpretation, and in the process derailing the actual discussion of each individual's interpretation. One doesn't need to familiarize his or herself with every single quote from George Lucas or Leland Chee in order to enjoy and form his or her own conclusions about a story that they read or watched.

This segment is what I disagree most with, however.

First of all, that is a gross misapplication of the term appeal to authority. If citing fact from a divinely recognized (canon) source is an appeal to authority, anyone who ever cited empirical fact in defense of a hypothesis is guilty of one as well. That doesn't begin to fit an appeal to authority, which is the opposite completely.

That nitpick aside, I think I get the gist anyway: Since you think personal interpretation matters more than official sanctioning, obviously you would be critical of something as unrealiable as canon being used to validate one interpretation over another. I just don't see how you can think that highly of personal interpretation. If fans want to discuss, and they will, personal interpretations helps no one but the interpreter. Fine, canon isn't as perfect as we would like, not by a longshot, but personal interpretation is so weak an alternative that it doesn't even play in the same league. It answers nothing. So if one wants a more definite answer, canon is the way to go. The only way.

Not to mention that between canon and personal intepretation, the former has oceans more impact on future works than the latter does. There is no comparison. Frankly I read this argument as: "Option X isn't perfect, so option Y is superior even though it is even less perfect. Since both are imperfect, it doesn't matter which rules". It shouldn't be hard to see why I find that sentiment worthy of critique.

What is wrong with trying to legitimize one's interpretation? If the other party disagrees, he can put his fingers in his ears just as easily as when he was faced with mere opinion.

Quote:

For instance, I'm not really invested in the Even Piell character, so I could not care less if he died at the Citadel or on Coruscant, and I'm not really waiting with baited breath for some sort of Lucasfilm clarification on the issue.

Then dig up something that does matter to you, and imagine that the truth of that issue was somehow directly related to when Even died. If your opinion has now changed, can you still tell me it doesn't matter just because you don't happen to care about that aspect of the universe? Sounds like shoddy grounds for basing an absolute upon.

Quote:

Discussing whether Anakin is the Chosen One allows numerous interpretations. Whether the label of "canon" is relevant to an interpretation is ultimately up to the individual, so discussing what is or isn't canon is only relevant to that interpretation.

Agreed. And this in turn means that upon the premise that the fan in question does find canon relevant to their interpretation, as is usually the case when fans want to convince other fans of something, knowing the nature of Holocron continuity matters a great deal. Other fans can just bow out in disinterest, without that making canon any less important overall._________________I discuss to learn, not to win. Then again, learning enough tends to translate to victory in the end anyway.